On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:21:39 -0500
Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:12:11 EST, Keith Moore said:
465 is intended for message submissions. because it is a new port,
it's reasonable to require authentication. and because authentication is
required it's far less likely to be used as a means of relaying mail from
unauthorized parties. also, having a separate port for message submission
provides an opportunity to provide additional processing that is
appropriate at
message submission (like rewriting message headers to add missing domains,
dates, etc., and/or rejecting messages which aren't perfectly formatted) but
not appropriate for mail relays.
And here I thought we already had 587 for that....
sorry, that's what I meant. I hadn't had enough caffeine when I wrote that.
I don't think we should legitimize 465.